This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Lee鈥揈nfield article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources:聽 Google ( books聽路 news聽路 scholar聽路 free images聽路 WP聽refs)聽路 FENS聽路 JSTOR聽路 TWL |
![]() | Lee鈥揈nfield was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
on the MLE section there is a photograph of a carbine, but it is not an MLE, in fact it is not even claiming to be one; the caption is Cavalry carbine, 1865 - BL Foster 994, it is a percussion cap
this image seems a little pointless and irrelevant I think it should be removed 鈥 Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.224.178.123 ( talk) 12:31, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
Yes, I agree. It should removed. -- Unit2357 ( talk) 15:04, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
I am not sure any Lee Enfield's remain in service today, at least not with the British army, especially not those in .303 (table taken directly from article)
Model/Mark | In Service |
---|---|
Magazine Lee-Enfield | 1895鈥1926 |
Charger Loading Lee-Enfield | 1906鈥1926 |
Short Magazine Lee-Enfield Mk I | 1904鈥1926 |
Short Magazine Lee-Enfield Mk II | 1906鈥1927 |
Short Magazine Lee-Enfield Mk III/III* | 1907 鈥 present |
Short Magazine Lee-Enfield Mk V | 1922鈥1924 (trials only; 20,000 produced) |
Rifle No. 1 Mk VI | 1930鈥1933 (trials only; 1,025 produced) |
Rifle No. 4 Mk I | 1939 鈥 present (officially adopted in 1941) |
Rifle No. 4 Mk I* | 1942 鈥 present |
Rifle No 5 Mk I "Jungle Carbine" | 1944 鈥 present |
Rifle No. 4 Mk 2 | 1949 鈥 present |
Rifle 7.62mm 2A | 1964 鈥 present |
Rifle 7.62mm 2A1 | 1965 鈥 present |
( Fdsdh1 ( talk) 11:56, 31 May 2013 (UTC))
A minor point but surely, given the widespread use of this weapon among British Empire/Commonwealth forces, it would be slightly more fitting to include a bit more variation in the images? This seems to be a trend with quite a number of articles. 鈥 Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.147.62.103 ( talk) 21:28, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
The Enfield .303 is no longer in use by either the military or the police in Pakistan. Thus the reference to it being used by second line troops and police in Pakistan should be deleted. 鈥 Preceding unsigned comment added by Bolori ( talk 鈥 contribs) 14:30, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
This is untrue, the Mosin-Nagant is from 1891 and still in Finnish service today (as the 7.62 Tkiv 85) 孝芯胁邪褉懈褖 ( talk) 22:37, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
In that case the Carcano would be the oldest serving bolt action, being used by the National Liberation Army in Libya and designed in 1890. And There's a chance somewhere out there there is a bolt action still technically in service older than that. I think we should be careful about making claims like that in the article. Nlesbirel ( talk) 06:12, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
Propose the following: "So closely was the weapon associated with British colonialism that in the film Breaker Morant, a group of prisoners is said to have been shot "under rule three-oh-three" (though James K. Kirschke notes that there is no evidence that any such rule actually existed." [1] There was an objection and a call for discussion. DavidOaks ( talk) 13:12, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
Rule 303 is in the same chapter of the "Code of Human Conduct" as the rule that allows cattle posses to hang rustlers, white vigilantes to hang Black rapists, Black militants to ring Black collaborators with burning tires, and revolutionary crowds to guillotine counterrevolutionaries. The chapter title is "Summary Executions." The procedural rules for "Summary Executions" are that a charismatic leader or an unreasoning mob, despite limited evidence and protestations of innocence, identifies someone as clearly guilty and as clearly heinous--as someone deserving of the irrevocable punishment of death. This chapter, including Morant's "Rule 303," favors results over process, ends over means, and swift certainty over equivocating doubt.
"Rule 303" and its related rules have a patina of higher justice promptly, albeit terribly, executed. We should not be fooled. Human beings should be respectfully suspicious of their motivations. Righteous vengeance is no justification for the immediate execution of another human being. Human beings should be diligently alert to human errors and human frailties. Certitude and passionate action are no comfort when doubt and deliberation are the better paths. Beneath the patina of justice is the hardened heart, beating to atavistic instincts that divide the world into them and us. They deserve death inflicted by us.
Drew L. Kershen in the Oklahoma City University Law Review Volume 22, Number 1 (1997). DavidOaks ( talk) 13:17, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
(outdent) Seems reasonable! DavidOaks ( talk) 12:19, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
References
I have understood for many years that upon the adoption of the No. 4 rifle in early WWII that the "Lee" name was dropped completely. As I have read in US literature on the subject, the SMLE was the last Lee-Enfield because the Lee name was not associated with the No. 4 rifle. 鈥擯receding unsigned comment added by 207.114.151.21 ( talk) 19:07, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
Nope. It was in 1926 that the nomenclature changed from "Short, Magazine, Lee-Enfield" to: "Rifle No.1" but it was only the naming that changed. (That is to say why before the No.4.) As a rifle type, the rifles remain Lee-Enfields. 鈥 Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.154.56.245 ( talk) 16:41, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
its always lee enfield, one question though, Lee-Enfield or Lee Enfield? ( Fdsdh1 ( talk) 01:09, 10 November 2012 (UTC))
Great article. My thanks to all the contributors. One of the things I enjoyed was learning of rifle users using the names "Smelly" (SMLE) and "Emily" (MLE) and I found myself reading the letters that way as I progressed through the article.
What I'd like to see added, if anyone is able, is a bit more colour; perhaps some quotes from British WWI troops about their feelings towards the rifle. Since the gun was very effective I imagine that British soldiers were quite favourable towards the guns; if anyone has a soldier's quote or reminiscence about the guns it would be marvellous to see that in the article. And/or something from politicians about the gun's contribution to British success. For someone who has no deep interest in weaponry I would have been pleased to see such human angles alongside the detailed information of the weapon's build and capabilities. -- bodnotbod ( talk) 13:19, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
There are actually two quite different ".410" cartridges being discussed here.
The first is the common ".410" sporting shotgun cartridge, made in several different lengths (which may prevent conversions with short chambers from accepting longer cartridges) while the other is the quite distinct ".410 Musket" or ".410 Indian Police" cartridge, produced by loading a .303 cartridge which had not had the final "necking down" step performed.
The .410 shotgun conversions to the commercial sporting cartridge were largely the result of British and Australian gun control laws. Shotguns could be owned with little paperwork, while military rifles required registration and police permission, secure storage, in-home inspections of storage, etc. As a result, many .303 rifles had their barrels drilled and reamed out to .410 and the chambers recut to accept commercial .410 sporting shotgun cartridges. This allowed the owners to register them as shotguns rather than as rifles. Many such conversions were done by individual gunsmiths, though there were some "factory" .410 shotgun SMLEs produced in Australia after WW II.
The .410 Musket was the result of the government of British India wanting to arm police with a weapon that had a reduced range (for general public safety) and that could not accept easily-obtained ammunition (to make them less useful for insurgents), thus the development of a unique "Musket" cartridge.
British (and British-ruled India) ammunition manufacturers used cordite as a propellant, this required that the strands of cordite be loaded into the case while the case still a (nearly) straight-walled cylinder; the case mouth would then be "necked down" to the final form, to accept the .311" bullet. This is unlike the case-forming and loading processes used elsewhere when using granulated propellants where the case is brought to its final form prior to installation of the primer and propellant charge.
In the case of the .410 Musket, the partially formed .303 case was simply loaded with a suitable charge of a granulated smokeless powder, as used in a shotgun cartridge, and then loaded more or less in the same fashion as a shotgun cartridge with either fine shot, "segmented shot" or a "ball" round that was literally a round lead ball.
The chamber for the .410 Musket has much more taper than that of a sporting .410 shotgun cartridge, and even 2" .410 shotgun cartridges will not chamber.
The .410 Musket remains in use with police in both India and Pakistan ( http://policewb.gov.in/wbp/unit/ptc/ptctrg.php for an Indian example) and ammunition is presumably loaded in both nations, but it is not available for export or civilian sales.
.410 Musket has been loaded commercially (presumably under contract from Indian or Pakistani government users) by British firms such as Kynoch in the past, but there does not seem to have been any production in decades.
While many of the .410 Muskets that have been sold as surplus outside India and Pakistan have been modified to use commercial .410 shotgun cartridges (the US surplus gun dealer Springfield Sporters, for example, reamed the chambers of many of the .410 Muskets they imported, they charged about $10 more for this work) it is possible to modify .303 cartridge cases to use for handloading .410 Musket. The usual procedure is to anneal the mouth of a .303 cartridge case with a propane gas torch, then load with a "fire-forming" charge of a small amount of a fast-burning powder (5 grains of Bullseye powder for example) topped by filling the case with a filler material such as corn starch to provide sufficient resistance for the powder to burn properly. When fired in the .410 Musket chamber, the soft (annealed) brass of the case mouth will expand to fit the .410 Musket chamber and can subsequently be loaded as a .410 Musket cartridge case. There is a web page on this process at http://www.fourten.org.uk/reloading303.html 鈥 Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.228.162.7 ( talk) 09:51, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
No documentation provided for Filipino use of the No4 Lee Enfield. Such use is extremely unlikely as the Phillipines were under US control at prior to WW II and used US-supplied small arms, in particular the .30 caliber M1917 "Enfield" rifle. Post-war/post-independence small arms continued to be supplied by the US.
The No4 Lee Enfield was in short supply in Britain prior to the Japanese invasion of the Philippines. None would have been available to supply to a non-Commonwealth nation. While some Canadian-produced No4 rifles were supplied to Chinese forces, there is no evidence that any were supplied to Filipino forces, regular or irregular. Nor is it likely that Japanese-captured No4s would have been supplied to Filipino forces collaborating with the Japanese, as few of the Commonwealth forces the Japanese were facing were equipped with No4s. British forces at Singapoe and Hong Kong were equipped with MkIII Lee Enfields, and Indian, Australian and New Zealand forces were almost entirely equipped with MkIIIs for the duration of the war. 鈥 Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.175.212.115 ( talk) 23:34, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
It says there that the Empire countries called it a 303- this was also a popular name with British troops, and my grandfather- who served National Service briefly as a Private in the REME and then as a 2nd and later full Lieutenant in the RASC. He has told me, on frequent occasions, that in his experience it was always called '303' in casual usage. I was contemplating add this to the article. 鈥 Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.134.157.43 ( talk) 21:26, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi I am hoping to find out more about this rifle which has these Markings . (A crown with er below, then BSA Co 1902. )On the stock it Has (Birmingham BSA A crown & M.C.)all in a circle. Then (Commonwealth Of Australia MTLY Forces .AI?). In another circle. It also has other stampings On the stock. The rifle has all matching numbers, it also has a fold up peep Sight with cross slide adjustments. It does not have a safety catch only a Magazine slide arrangement. It also has brass muzzle cap (dirt protector聽?) The rifle has a greasy film all over there are also other stampings on the barrel Has brass stock plate with oil bottle and pull through in stock hole.
Hoping someone can help Regards. Ron A. 鈥 Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.228.209.128 ( talk) 03:08, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
"For example, there are some surviving SHTLE Mk III rifles made in 1916 at the Birmingham Small Arms Co in Victoria Australia that have the "pre 1915" round knob bolt action."
Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't find any clues in the article to explain just what a "SHTLE" rifle is. I've never heard of any such thing. "Short Hand-Training Lee-Enfield"? Maybe the person who wrote that sentence, or some other knowledgeable fellow could explain the acronym, because now I'm curious. .45Colt 05:09, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
It stands for: SHorT Lee Enfield. Simples! As to "never heard of any such thing", take look at the left hand butt socket on some SMLEs, many have that designation stamped there.
Barrel length for first entry on the right (presumably mark 1) is listed as 44 inches, which is absurdly long and i can find no evidence of any service rifle with a barrel length this long, much less the enfield. needs changing.
here are the appropriate barrel lengths:
Barrel length
767 mm (Lee-Enfield Mk.1) 640 mm (SMLE No.1 Mk.3) 640 mm (SMLE No.4 Mk.1) 478 mm (SMLE No.5 Jungle Carbine) 鈥 Preceding unsigned comment added by 100.32.154.2 ( talk) 20:16, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Lee鈥揈nfield. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.鈥 InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 09:13, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Lee鈥揈nfield. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.鈥 InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 01:02, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Lee鈥揈nfield. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.鈥 InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 10:56, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Lee鈥揈nfield. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.鈥 InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 09:12, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
The IOF .315 sporting rifle is a civilian version of the British military Lee鈥揈nfield rifle, chambered in the 8x50mmR Mannlicher cartridge rather than the .303 British military cartridge due to Indian gun control laws. 1.23.152.116 ( talk) 10:30, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Lee鈥揈nfield. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.鈥 InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 23:17, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
A lot of good pictures on this article, but any picture of the quintessential British rifle being used by British forces seems rather conspicuous by its absence. Is there any particular reason for this? Sadly, I don't have one of my own to contribute. -- Vometia ( talk) 14:27, 3 June 2018 (UTC) You may try downloading one from google, just remember to cite where the photo is from or you might be subject to copyright 11:54, 28 February 2020 (GMT+8) 鈥斅燩receding unsigned comment added by 203.168.214.47 ( talk)
Ian McCollum just explained that the SMLE Mk. III did NOT initally accept Spitzer rounds. The article should be changed to reflect that. -- 84.189.95.128 ( talk) 13:14, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
@ 88.243.143.211: The recently added pop culture section does not adequately demonstrate its importance. As stated at MOS:CULTURALREFS, pop culture sections should not be included, unless there are secondary sources that provide in-depth coverage that explain why a particular appearance in popular culture is noteworthy. Loafiewa ( talk) 21:50, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
In 2001 our long inactive colleague Commander Zulu added, referencing a printed book, that during WWI SMLE Mk III cost 拢3 15s, and it's still present in the article. But I find it suspicious that Frederick Kellaway described a different cost dynamic after the war: namely, it "fell from 拢4 1s. to 拢3 8s". Could anyone please check in that 2001 book at which year the price was 拢3 15s? Ain92 ( talk) 10:22, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Lee鈥揈nfield article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources:聽 Google ( books聽路 news聽路 scholar聽路 free images聽路 WP聽refs)聽路 FENS聽路 JSTOR聽路 TWL |
![]() | Lee鈥揈nfield was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
on the MLE section there is a photograph of a carbine, but it is not an MLE, in fact it is not even claiming to be one; the caption is Cavalry carbine, 1865 - BL Foster 994, it is a percussion cap
this image seems a little pointless and irrelevant I think it should be removed 鈥 Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.224.178.123 ( talk) 12:31, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
Yes, I agree. It should removed. -- Unit2357 ( talk) 15:04, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
I am not sure any Lee Enfield's remain in service today, at least not with the British army, especially not those in .303 (table taken directly from article)
Model/Mark | In Service |
---|---|
Magazine Lee-Enfield | 1895鈥1926 |
Charger Loading Lee-Enfield | 1906鈥1926 |
Short Magazine Lee-Enfield Mk I | 1904鈥1926 |
Short Magazine Lee-Enfield Mk II | 1906鈥1927 |
Short Magazine Lee-Enfield Mk III/III* | 1907 鈥 present |
Short Magazine Lee-Enfield Mk V | 1922鈥1924 (trials only; 20,000 produced) |
Rifle No. 1 Mk VI | 1930鈥1933 (trials only; 1,025 produced) |
Rifle No. 4 Mk I | 1939 鈥 present (officially adopted in 1941) |
Rifle No. 4 Mk I* | 1942 鈥 present |
Rifle No 5 Mk I "Jungle Carbine" | 1944 鈥 present |
Rifle No. 4 Mk 2 | 1949 鈥 present |
Rifle 7.62mm 2A | 1964 鈥 present |
Rifle 7.62mm 2A1 | 1965 鈥 present |
( Fdsdh1 ( talk) 11:56, 31 May 2013 (UTC))
A minor point but surely, given the widespread use of this weapon among British Empire/Commonwealth forces, it would be slightly more fitting to include a bit more variation in the images? This seems to be a trend with quite a number of articles. 鈥 Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.147.62.103 ( talk) 21:28, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
The Enfield .303 is no longer in use by either the military or the police in Pakistan. Thus the reference to it being used by second line troops and police in Pakistan should be deleted. 鈥 Preceding unsigned comment added by Bolori ( talk 鈥 contribs) 14:30, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
This is untrue, the Mosin-Nagant is from 1891 and still in Finnish service today (as the 7.62 Tkiv 85) 孝芯胁邪褉懈褖 ( talk) 22:37, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
In that case the Carcano would be the oldest serving bolt action, being used by the National Liberation Army in Libya and designed in 1890. And There's a chance somewhere out there there is a bolt action still technically in service older than that. I think we should be careful about making claims like that in the article. Nlesbirel ( talk) 06:12, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
Propose the following: "So closely was the weapon associated with British colonialism that in the film Breaker Morant, a group of prisoners is said to have been shot "under rule three-oh-three" (though James K. Kirschke notes that there is no evidence that any such rule actually existed." [1] There was an objection and a call for discussion. DavidOaks ( talk) 13:12, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
Rule 303 is in the same chapter of the "Code of Human Conduct" as the rule that allows cattle posses to hang rustlers, white vigilantes to hang Black rapists, Black militants to ring Black collaborators with burning tires, and revolutionary crowds to guillotine counterrevolutionaries. The chapter title is "Summary Executions." The procedural rules for "Summary Executions" are that a charismatic leader or an unreasoning mob, despite limited evidence and protestations of innocence, identifies someone as clearly guilty and as clearly heinous--as someone deserving of the irrevocable punishment of death. This chapter, including Morant's "Rule 303," favors results over process, ends over means, and swift certainty over equivocating doubt.
"Rule 303" and its related rules have a patina of higher justice promptly, albeit terribly, executed. We should not be fooled. Human beings should be respectfully suspicious of their motivations. Righteous vengeance is no justification for the immediate execution of another human being. Human beings should be diligently alert to human errors and human frailties. Certitude and passionate action are no comfort when doubt and deliberation are the better paths. Beneath the patina of justice is the hardened heart, beating to atavistic instincts that divide the world into them and us. They deserve death inflicted by us.
Drew L. Kershen in the Oklahoma City University Law Review Volume 22, Number 1 (1997). DavidOaks ( talk) 13:17, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
(outdent) Seems reasonable! DavidOaks ( talk) 12:19, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
References
I have understood for many years that upon the adoption of the No. 4 rifle in early WWII that the "Lee" name was dropped completely. As I have read in US literature on the subject, the SMLE was the last Lee-Enfield because the Lee name was not associated with the No. 4 rifle. 鈥擯receding unsigned comment added by 207.114.151.21 ( talk) 19:07, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
Nope. It was in 1926 that the nomenclature changed from "Short, Magazine, Lee-Enfield" to: "Rifle No.1" but it was only the naming that changed. (That is to say why before the No.4.) As a rifle type, the rifles remain Lee-Enfields. 鈥 Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.154.56.245 ( talk) 16:41, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
its always lee enfield, one question though, Lee-Enfield or Lee Enfield? ( Fdsdh1 ( talk) 01:09, 10 November 2012 (UTC))
Great article. My thanks to all the contributors. One of the things I enjoyed was learning of rifle users using the names "Smelly" (SMLE) and "Emily" (MLE) and I found myself reading the letters that way as I progressed through the article.
What I'd like to see added, if anyone is able, is a bit more colour; perhaps some quotes from British WWI troops about their feelings towards the rifle. Since the gun was very effective I imagine that British soldiers were quite favourable towards the guns; if anyone has a soldier's quote or reminiscence about the guns it would be marvellous to see that in the article. And/or something from politicians about the gun's contribution to British success. For someone who has no deep interest in weaponry I would have been pleased to see such human angles alongside the detailed information of the weapon's build and capabilities. -- bodnotbod ( talk) 13:19, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
There are actually two quite different ".410" cartridges being discussed here.
The first is the common ".410" sporting shotgun cartridge, made in several different lengths (which may prevent conversions with short chambers from accepting longer cartridges) while the other is the quite distinct ".410 Musket" or ".410 Indian Police" cartridge, produced by loading a .303 cartridge which had not had the final "necking down" step performed.
The .410 shotgun conversions to the commercial sporting cartridge were largely the result of British and Australian gun control laws. Shotguns could be owned with little paperwork, while military rifles required registration and police permission, secure storage, in-home inspections of storage, etc. As a result, many .303 rifles had their barrels drilled and reamed out to .410 and the chambers recut to accept commercial .410 sporting shotgun cartridges. This allowed the owners to register them as shotguns rather than as rifles. Many such conversions were done by individual gunsmiths, though there were some "factory" .410 shotgun SMLEs produced in Australia after WW II.
The .410 Musket was the result of the government of British India wanting to arm police with a weapon that had a reduced range (for general public safety) and that could not accept easily-obtained ammunition (to make them less useful for insurgents), thus the development of a unique "Musket" cartridge.
British (and British-ruled India) ammunition manufacturers used cordite as a propellant, this required that the strands of cordite be loaded into the case while the case still a (nearly) straight-walled cylinder; the case mouth would then be "necked down" to the final form, to accept the .311" bullet. This is unlike the case-forming and loading processes used elsewhere when using granulated propellants where the case is brought to its final form prior to installation of the primer and propellant charge.
In the case of the .410 Musket, the partially formed .303 case was simply loaded with a suitable charge of a granulated smokeless powder, as used in a shotgun cartridge, and then loaded more or less in the same fashion as a shotgun cartridge with either fine shot, "segmented shot" or a "ball" round that was literally a round lead ball.
The chamber for the .410 Musket has much more taper than that of a sporting .410 shotgun cartridge, and even 2" .410 shotgun cartridges will not chamber.
The .410 Musket remains in use with police in both India and Pakistan ( http://policewb.gov.in/wbp/unit/ptc/ptctrg.php for an Indian example) and ammunition is presumably loaded in both nations, but it is not available for export or civilian sales.
.410 Musket has been loaded commercially (presumably under contract from Indian or Pakistani government users) by British firms such as Kynoch in the past, but there does not seem to have been any production in decades.
While many of the .410 Muskets that have been sold as surplus outside India and Pakistan have been modified to use commercial .410 shotgun cartridges (the US surplus gun dealer Springfield Sporters, for example, reamed the chambers of many of the .410 Muskets they imported, they charged about $10 more for this work) it is possible to modify .303 cartridge cases to use for handloading .410 Musket. The usual procedure is to anneal the mouth of a .303 cartridge case with a propane gas torch, then load with a "fire-forming" charge of a small amount of a fast-burning powder (5 grains of Bullseye powder for example) topped by filling the case with a filler material such as corn starch to provide sufficient resistance for the powder to burn properly. When fired in the .410 Musket chamber, the soft (annealed) brass of the case mouth will expand to fit the .410 Musket chamber and can subsequently be loaded as a .410 Musket cartridge case. There is a web page on this process at http://www.fourten.org.uk/reloading303.html 鈥 Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.228.162.7 ( talk) 09:51, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
No documentation provided for Filipino use of the No4 Lee Enfield. Such use is extremely unlikely as the Phillipines were under US control at prior to WW II and used US-supplied small arms, in particular the .30 caliber M1917 "Enfield" rifle. Post-war/post-independence small arms continued to be supplied by the US.
The No4 Lee Enfield was in short supply in Britain prior to the Japanese invasion of the Philippines. None would have been available to supply to a non-Commonwealth nation. While some Canadian-produced No4 rifles were supplied to Chinese forces, there is no evidence that any were supplied to Filipino forces, regular or irregular. Nor is it likely that Japanese-captured No4s would have been supplied to Filipino forces collaborating with the Japanese, as few of the Commonwealth forces the Japanese were facing were equipped with No4s. British forces at Singapoe and Hong Kong were equipped with MkIII Lee Enfields, and Indian, Australian and New Zealand forces were almost entirely equipped with MkIIIs for the duration of the war. 鈥 Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.175.212.115 ( talk) 23:34, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
It says there that the Empire countries called it a 303- this was also a popular name with British troops, and my grandfather- who served National Service briefly as a Private in the REME and then as a 2nd and later full Lieutenant in the RASC. He has told me, on frequent occasions, that in his experience it was always called '303' in casual usage. I was contemplating add this to the article. 鈥 Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.134.157.43 ( talk) 21:26, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi I am hoping to find out more about this rifle which has these Markings . (A crown with er below, then BSA Co 1902. )On the stock it Has (Birmingham BSA A crown & M.C.)all in a circle. Then (Commonwealth Of Australia MTLY Forces .AI?). In another circle. It also has other stampings On the stock. The rifle has all matching numbers, it also has a fold up peep Sight with cross slide adjustments. It does not have a safety catch only a Magazine slide arrangement. It also has brass muzzle cap (dirt protector聽?) The rifle has a greasy film all over there are also other stampings on the barrel Has brass stock plate with oil bottle and pull through in stock hole.
Hoping someone can help Regards. Ron A. 鈥 Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.228.209.128 ( talk) 03:08, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
"For example, there are some surviving SHTLE Mk III rifles made in 1916 at the Birmingham Small Arms Co in Victoria Australia that have the "pre 1915" round knob bolt action."
Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't find any clues in the article to explain just what a "SHTLE" rifle is. I've never heard of any such thing. "Short Hand-Training Lee-Enfield"? Maybe the person who wrote that sentence, or some other knowledgeable fellow could explain the acronym, because now I'm curious. .45Colt 05:09, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
It stands for: SHorT Lee Enfield. Simples! As to "never heard of any such thing", take look at the left hand butt socket on some SMLEs, many have that designation stamped there.
Barrel length for first entry on the right (presumably mark 1) is listed as 44 inches, which is absurdly long and i can find no evidence of any service rifle with a barrel length this long, much less the enfield. needs changing.
here are the appropriate barrel lengths:
Barrel length
767 mm (Lee-Enfield Mk.1) 640 mm (SMLE No.1 Mk.3) 640 mm (SMLE No.4 Mk.1) 478 mm (SMLE No.5 Jungle Carbine) 鈥 Preceding unsigned comment added by 100.32.154.2 ( talk) 20:16, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Lee鈥揈nfield. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.鈥 InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 09:13, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Lee鈥揈nfield. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.鈥 InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 01:02, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Lee鈥揈nfield. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.鈥 InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 10:56, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Lee鈥揈nfield. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.鈥 InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 09:12, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
The IOF .315 sporting rifle is a civilian version of the British military Lee鈥揈nfield rifle, chambered in the 8x50mmR Mannlicher cartridge rather than the .303 British military cartridge due to Indian gun control laws. 1.23.152.116 ( talk) 10:30, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Lee鈥揈nfield. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.鈥 InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 23:17, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
A lot of good pictures on this article, but any picture of the quintessential British rifle being used by British forces seems rather conspicuous by its absence. Is there any particular reason for this? Sadly, I don't have one of my own to contribute. -- Vometia ( talk) 14:27, 3 June 2018 (UTC) You may try downloading one from google, just remember to cite where the photo is from or you might be subject to copyright 11:54, 28 February 2020 (GMT+8) 鈥斅燩receding unsigned comment added by 203.168.214.47 ( talk)
Ian McCollum just explained that the SMLE Mk. III did NOT initally accept Spitzer rounds. The article should be changed to reflect that. -- 84.189.95.128 ( talk) 13:14, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
@ 88.243.143.211: The recently added pop culture section does not adequately demonstrate its importance. As stated at MOS:CULTURALREFS, pop culture sections should not be included, unless there are secondary sources that provide in-depth coverage that explain why a particular appearance in popular culture is noteworthy. Loafiewa ( talk) 21:50, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
In 2001 our long inactive colleague Commander Zulu added, referencing a printed book, that during WWI SMLE Mk III cost 拢3 15s, and it's still present in the article. But I find it suspicious that Frederick Kellaway described a different cost dynamic after the war: namely, it "fell from 拢4 1s. to 拢3 8s". Could anyone please check in that 2001 book at which year the price was 拢3 15s? Ain92 ( talk) 10:22, 22 May 2022 (UTC)